Wednesday, 1 February 2017

Thomas
Jefferson, the third President of the United States, wisley observed that
eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. It is a point that the world should
perhaps have pondered more when candidate, and now forty-fifth President,
Donald Trump pledged during the last Presidential election campaign to ban
Muslim immigration to the United States. No-one then took the pledge to be
anything more than empty campaign rhetoric, and outside of the United States
even fewer people expected him to be elected to office anyway.

Well,
now it has happened, and to confound matters, this most unusual and
unpredictable of Presidents seems hell-bent on keeping his election promises,
at least the more outlandish of them. All this puts the rest of the world,
especially America’s allies and close friends in a quandary. Do they turn a
blind eye to what he is doing, in the hope, perhaps, that after the flush of
excitement wears off, the President will “come to his senses”, or do they speak
out now to possibly circumvent the next move? The Statue of Liberty does still
bear the legend “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to
breathe free,” after all!

What
is currently happening in the United States is certainly contrary to the
principles its Founding Fathers espoused so eloquently. George Washington’s
famous aspiration, “I had
always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable asylum to the
virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong,”
has defined the United States for nearly 250 years. It has been given constant
effect in American history from the nineteenth century migrations,
through to the German and Jewish refugees of the 1930s, and the Asian refugees
of the 1970s. The United States have been the world’s great melting-pot. Until
now.

So,
what, if anything, should New Zealand do? Fulminating against the President
(while possibly good for the soul) ultimately goes only so far. So, for a
start, we obviously need to clarify quickly any potential impact the new
American policy might have on New Zealand residents with passports from the
affected countries, and to offer them whatever support is appropriate. (Reports
dual nationals are not affected unless they have visited one of the seven
banned countries in the last five years are still concerning and confusing.)

As
to the wider question, as a small nation, we have historically played our part,
albeit parsimoniously at times. The resettlement of the Polish children under Peter
Fraser is our shining light, but we have responded well on other occasions as
well. We have always acted on the basis of perceived need, rather than the
political views or religious affiliations of those in strife.We have always upheld the value that former
President Obama promoted just this week, “We do not have religious tests to our
compassion.”

An
obvious move we could make is to increase the number of refugees we accept each
year. A doubling in our refugee quota has long been argued for. That would be a
good start, but our overall approach to immigration also needs to change,
because we do not fill the annual quotas we have now. Resettlement policy
should no longer just be the preserve of central government, a tap to be turned
on and off as it suits, if you like. Rather, we need to involve local
government, business and the community far more than is currently the case, as
part of an overall long-term population strategy.

At
another level, the events of the last week – in New Zealand as much as in the
United States – have reinforced the place of a party like United Future in our
political spectrum, with its overt commitment to keeping our country open,
tolerated and united. We need to be unafraid of upholding diversity, and
supporting creativity, innovation, and New Zealand’s place in the world. These
are enduring liberal values, under a pressure they have not faced for at least
two generations. Although they are common sense, reflective of the shared
values of our communities, they cannot continue to be taken granted, and so
need their champions.

We
need to give those New Zealanders who share them an explicit place in our
political discourse which they can rally around.After all, Thomas Jefferson’s observation is
as relevant now as it ever was.

1 comment:

It is a huge dilemma to decide one way or the other - do I accept Trump's new Executive Orders? No. The other question is - Even though the Orders are extreme, are they right for America right now till 2021? That's an argument I am having with myself. Sometimes rude doings in politics can actually benefit us in the long term, as New Zealand's negative policies of the past has done us a huge favour.

But the problem here is, the global effect of the Orders. Therefore, I have to say it has brought me within two minds - wait and see, and no the Orders are destructive, and will destroy this Presidency very quickly.

One further note: I have read about the Nazi election campaign of 1932 and the resulting victory in 1933, where Hitler decreed a whole bunch of stuff that I find parallel to Trump's recent Executive Orders. It is unfortunate on my part to compare this, but at the time of reading, news feeds showed me too many similarities that made me sleepless for a week.

If you think That's being a bit dramatic, then I think those who read this blog needs to re-read history. It's frighteningly becoming repetitive.

What should our Government do? Be verbal, Tell the US it's unacceptable to treat a human being like trash too be taken out. Second, place stronger emphasis on placing sanctions in areas that will hopefully wake them up a little - for one reason, what is happening is decisively unconstitutional.